Anything I can do? Sue Spar?

Abraham · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:35

I'm sure there is a level of QC, but I'd imagine as with anything there could be duff batches, it is probably writing to them with the full details from the bottle, they may be able to pull any from that batch that are still out there if it is faulty.

dannyjo22 · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:36

Tefal said:
You know how the "factor" system works?

First they take the average white guy and stick him in the sun then time how long it takes him to turn pink.

then they cover him in the sun lotion, the extra number of minutes before he goes pink again is the factor..

It seems neither do you.

The factor system I was always told and google has just confirmed

is if it takes 10 minutes for you to burn with nothing the protection is 15 times that time if you are wearing cream spf 15, not 15 minutes added protection.

Of course it's never that simple, but that was the rough guide I have always used. Factor 15 has always been enough for me with my skin and I always tend to seek the shade for the hottest parts of the day.

Hilly · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:36

hola_adios said:
So zinc oxide is not a natural product? And everything is a chemical, including H2O. Such broad labels are inadequate.

The value of antioxidant products is much less than what is claimed. Not many things can protect you from the effects of UV rays on your DNA, unless you do know how to create a retrovirus to fix such damage.

Taken from wiki: "ZnO is present in the Earth's crust as the mineral zincite; however, most ZnO used commercially is produced synthetically."

Nearly all conventional sunscreen products contain cancer causing chemicals for starters. Those which don't generally dont' get labelled as Sun Protection. If for example you were to use non-chemical sunscreen ingredients and call them "sunscreen" the FDA would consider them mislabelled.

UV exposure alone does not cause skin cancer, first and foremost. That much is a lie which the majority believe. Skin cancer can only be caused when UV exposuire is combined with cbnronic nutritional deficiences that create skin vulnerabilities.

Check out naturalnews.com for interesting reading.

Nitefly · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:37

AcidHell2 said:
it is still a legal mine field, you would still have to show defective profit and a million other things. Which is why I said even ignoring legal stuff.

As you said your self it isn't worth the effort, even if it was within the uk it wouldn't be worth the effort.

I assume you mean defective product, but yes, it isn't worth it whatever way unless you are prepared to pay for some expensive legal costs and probably expensive expert evidence, as well as have suffered some serious loss (e.g. cancer).

Kazz · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:38

AcidHell2 said:
Always check manufacture date if possible.

Out of interest, does anyone know how long a bottle of lotion would be effective for? A year or two?

matt_fsr · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:39

shifty_uk said:
I used the stuff all day. My girlfriend used the last of our decent brand stuff then switched to the Spar stuff. She was quite burnt because of this but not as severe as me hence the OP regarding defective product. She has darker hair and a much more tolerant skin type, too.

I wonder if there was some kind of reaction between the different suncreams?

Seems strange if she already had a layer of protection from the decent SPF15, and she still managed to get burnt.

Still, that Which article shows the complete lack of quality control over suncreams, and the need to slap on regular and often!

The way I thought it worked was that 'Factor' meant how many more times you could stay out in the sun beyond 'untreated' skin? :confused:

Can anyone correct me with some facts? I.E. If you'd burn in 15 mins normally, SPF2 would mean it'd take 30 mins to burn?

I've been pretty much fine with decent SPF25, 20 and 15 in Gran Canaria, Turkey, Crete, Portugal and Corfu. The only times I've ended up a bit pink is when I haven't re-applied often enough, like after a swim.

Glaucus · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:39

Kazz said:
Out of interest, does anyone know how long a bottle of lotion would be effective for? A year or two?

Advice is to change it every year.

Hatter The Mad · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:41

AcidHell2 said:
Normal sun lotion, the higher the factor the more greasy and harder it is to rub in. Where clear coat ones you don't have that problem, so it doesn't after if you go for a higher factor than normal.

Oh I see. I thought you were saying that just because it is clear, it doesn't make a difference what the factor is.

Nikias · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:44

I am not too hot on foreign law, but our own Consumer Protection Act 1987 was based on an EU Directive, so you could potentially have a claim against the manufacturer or importer into the EU. They would have primary liability rather than Spar. Do you still have the bottle?

As Nitefly has said, there are great barriers to successfully suing (especially abroad), but if you become seriously ill then seek legal advice. The claim is not doomed, but proving that the sun-cream was defective and a material cause of your loss may be difficult.

Glaucus · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:44

matt_fsr said:
Can anyone correct me with some facts? I.E. If you'd burn in 15 mins normally, SPF2 would mean it'd take 30 mins to burn?

.

As I understand it that's sort of true. But if you burn in 15mins at 10am your going to burn a lot faster at midday. So it's to over simplified. Also depends if it's being washed of and how it's applied. I have read it's more effective to apply it before going into the sun.

Nitefly · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:48

On a sort of a side note, I never use lotion any more. It just greases up my skin and makes me feel horrible. Instead I stay out in the sun for no more than 20 mins max on a hot sunny day and then stick to the shade - only sun cream if absolute emergency.

Energizer Bunny · 27 Jun 2011 at 15:49

It isn't tied to any specific time period. It simply increases your protection by a factor of whatever the number is (30 for example), hence the name. If you are wearing factor 30 it will theoretically take you 30 times as long to burn in the sun as it normally would, or to put it another way it reduces the strength of the sun by a factor of 30.

With regards to the OP, in direct sun in the middle of the way you can get quite seriously burned well inside 30 minutes, so I guess factor 15, even if new, might only protect you for a matter of 4 hours or so. How long were you out for?

Oh and best of luck for the doctors appointment. I got absolutely fried up a ski slope a few years ago so I feel your pain. My whole forehead basically scabbed over after than one. The pain was unbelievable.

gothic_hobbit · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:06

Factor 50 is your friend

dekez · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:11

I've only ever used factor 50 in the mountains for my face, using factor 50 on the beach you might as well just sit in the shade if your going to burn that easily!

Energize · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:18

Factor 15!? People actually buy stuff that weak? Didn't realise anyone bought anything less than 50.

Jonny ///M · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:24

Reminds me of the time I went straight to the pool in the morning until dinner time with NO sun cream on at all in Gran Canaria.

I think the pools makes it even worse?

Loads of blisters and cold showers for me

gothic_hobbit · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:28

How long does newly bought suncream last for ?

I read online that it's somewhere within the ballpark of 3 to 5 years but I'm not entirely convinced myself.

shifty_uk · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:31

Jonny ///M said:
Reminds me of the time I went straight to the pool in the morning until dinner time with NO sun cream on at all in Gran Canaria.

I think the pools makes it even worse?

Loads of blisters and cold showers for me

Yeah, I believe the rays bounce off the water and essentially hit you from all angles. Not good, man!

Energize · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:34

hilly said:
Check out naturalnews.com for interesting reading.

In the meanwhile check out Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone to see how wolfs bane mends broken bones and cures cancer.

Hatter The Mad · 27 Jun 2011 at 16:52

hilly said:
UV exposure alone does not cause skin cancer, first and foremost. That much is a lie which the majority believe. Skin cancer can only be caused when UV exposuire is combined with cbnronic nutritional deficiences that create skin vulnerabilities.

Rather than believing everything you read on the Internet, read up on some basic science and see why what you just said is not only wrong but unintuitive.

Radiation can cause cancer because it can interfere with the chemical processes that occur in cell replication (ie it is caused by interference with DNA replication).

Ultra violet radiation is radiation.

Easy-to-understand diagram:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/UVB/

GCSE stuff.

Stop peddling your lies - it could put someone equally gullible at risk (and I hope to god you either do not have children or that this is a massive troll).